Legal Opinion

Rogers v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 24, 1961PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin-, C. J.

This is an action to recover damages for injuries suffered by the plaintiff in a fall. The parties stipulated that the plaintiff’s damages were in the amount of $1500. The subordinate facts found by the trial court are not challenged. The plaintiff was walking on a private concrete walk adjacent to a building occupied by the defendant as a supermarket, in Willimantic, when she stumbled and fell because of a hole in the walk. She was going into the market to make some purchases and was on the walk regularly used by people going to the market. The hole was clearly a defect, and the defendant…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. King v. Cooney-Eckstein Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1913
  2. Smith v. Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
  3. Geoghegan v. Fox Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
  4. Shegda v. Hartford-Connecticut Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  5. Libero v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1956

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Robinson v. WeitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
  2. Teitelman v. BloomsteinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
  3. New Breed Logistics, Inc. v. Ct Indy Nh Tt, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
  4. Desy v. Dominick, Montano, No. Cv92 0516197 (Feb. 15, 1995)Connecticut Superior Court · 1995
  5. Hill v. Pizzo, No. Cv 98-0579951 (Feb. 7, 2001)Connecticut Superior Court · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API